What Innovation?: How Network Structures Influence Policy Outputs in UK Local Climate Mini-Publics

With the increasing recognition of the unequal distribution of climate burdens by affected communities and governmental bodies, there is growing demand for participatory and inclusive approaches to climate policy. At the local level in the UK, these demands are often closely tied to a need for a ‘just transition’; this entails moving beyond the input of the ‘usual suspects’ in shaping urban planning, economic development, and net-zero strategies (Howarth et al., 2021). A significant innovation in this area has been the use of local climate mini-publics, convened by local authorities to advise on, evaluate and refine climate policies. These mini-publics are intentionally designed to foster inclusivity and participation, particularly amongst those most likely to face the highest costs of climate change (Karpowitz et al., 2012; Erman, 2016; Asenbaum, 2016). This is achieved by recruiting a representative sample of the population, facilitating high-quality deliberative discussions, and ensuring all perspectives receive equal consideration. Much research has focused on improving the “in-the-room” dynamics of citizens engaging in deliberation, and the facilitators and experts directly engaged in the deliberative process (Wojciechowska, 2019; Baccaro et al., 2016; Schneidemesser et al., 2023). Much less has been done on the “behind-the-scenes” networks of organisers, promoters, and stakeholders who do the work of structuring, designing, and overseeing the process. This is an under-studied feature of the politics of climate mini-publics, and raises important questions about the influence such organizers may have on the deliberation outcomes and the broader implementation of climate justice. Focusing on these structures of oversight and control, this paper emphasises the structural constraints that shape how deliberative ideals of inclusivity and equality are executed. Drawing on a novel dataset of local climate mini-publics in the UK (2019-2024), this paper argues that these constraints do not exist in isolation but operate within an increasingly professionalised and monopolised network of social relations. While scholars have raised concerns about the professionalisation and commercialisation of the deliberative field (Bherer et al., 2017; Hendriks and Carson, 2008), the specific ways these dynamics influence deliberative outcomes remain unclear. To address this, this paper employs social network analysis (SNA) to explore the degrees of connectivity and dynamics in this network to identify the influence of particular clusters and centrality of individuals to the wider network. Through this analysis, we argue that the authenticity of local CMPs is called into question by the impacts of such a dense network, which result in overly similar and standardised processes. Ultimately, this study provides insights into the barriers and opportunities for CMPs to achieve their climate justice aspirations.